NorthSideSox72

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 03:53 PM) I assume they wanted to get rid of them as quickly as possible. Waiting around for a vet/animal control would have given the animals the opportunity to escape and pose an increased danger in the area. Though you do have to wonder if they violated some federal law there. Aren't tigers an endangered species? Still, pretty f'n sad. I'm sure a lot of zoos around the country/world would have accepted these animals. The first part is the key. Some deputy comes upon a bengal tiger, calls for animal control, now what? That animal could be gone in the blink of an eye to do who knows what. Pretty much have to shoot. Also, apparently, some animals were in traffic, others chasing livestock. And I bet the number of animal control folks out there was very few, compared to just plain cops. Sad situation, but really has to be that way. Oddly enough, tigers would not be endangered here, because they are not native to here. Wolves and Grizzlies are not native to Ohio either. But in any case, while I have not seen any case law on it, I'd have to think that exigent circumstances such as this would protect law enforcement from prosecution.

QUOTE (buhbuhburrrrlz @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 01:57 PM) Youtube vids are filled with ads these days. Happened to notice KW in an ad for a new Starz series with Kelsey Grammar about Chicago's mayor. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BxZSS8pViww LOL, I posted that, in this thread, a couple weeks back. I was then told by fathom that he had also posted it previously.

Now they are saying it is just a wolf and the monkey. Monkey will have to be destroyed because apparently they think it is diseased. The lone wolf is not really a threat, so they are saying people can go back to normal. In all, they killed 48 animals, and captured 6.

QUOTE (TaylorStSox @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 01:38 PM) I can only imagine this crazy clubhouse where spies are needed. Rios doing lines off a strippers boobs. AJ and MB playing beer pong. Sale and Beckham pulling 6 ft bongs. Ramirez and Viciedo sacrificing a goat next to their Santeria shrine. JFP riding around naked on a painted pony with a bottle of Wild Turkey in an Indian headdress. And Sergio carrying a little cooler screaming "tamale! tamale!." Oh, the insanity. That picture put a smile on my face. Thank you sir.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 12:52 PM) I'm sorry, but I'm confused. Are these two separate stories? Yeah, the bizarro waterbed story is from an earlier person who happened to be involved with exotic animals too. Not related, I don't think.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 11:22 AM) I see what you're saying in not wanting to put caps on non-TARP firms...but I think that out of your list...the more likely an option is to be effective, the closer to a cap it becomes. Some version of direct shareholder approval is a decent step, but I for example am not going to get the option to vote against salaries due to my retirement account, since I'm holding funds and not individual stocks, right? That still keeps the system isolated from people outside wall street...the power in that case gets transferred more to big mutual funds and retirement systems, which are already neck deep in this mess. In the case of a mutual fund, I believe the fund administrator acts as a default proxy on the shares. That could also be legislatively changed however.

They are now saying three animals remain unaccounted for: a monkey, a grizzly bear, and a mountain lion. The monkey can't survive a winter in Ohio, it will end up trying to get into a house or something and be caught pretty quick I'd bet. The Grizzly can survive the weather fine, but an animal that large used to being fed will go for garbage somewhere and easily be seen. I just hope it doesn't hurt anyone in the meantime. I am sure it is hungry. And a pistol won't do much against it either, they'll need a tranq, a shotgun or a high powered rifle. The mountain lion is the most likely to vanish permanently. That animal can hide easily, and survive the weather just fine. Also appears that the keeper let all his animals loose, then shot himself.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 10:59 AM) Well...I'd actually say its hard to argue there would be "Seriously negative consequences" to just about anything done in that vein if it was actually successful. I must say...this one is actually a hard one to deal with. You've got this "You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" setup on corporate boards and in the government that really has been built up to protect this system...no board will vote down a compensation package because the person they vote against will then act against everyone else's compensation. I'm open to ideas of how to restructure the corporate voting process/corporate board process to deal with this without government fiat...but that's sort of how we got to Sarbanes-Oxley. Otherwise...I'm not sure how you can deal with this issue without mandatory caps. A few things they could do, that might not entirely fix it but might help, would be to put power more onto the individual shareholders (this is for public companies of course). Such as... --Require all shareholder voting events to be provided online and free to shareholders --Further detail in reporting all salaries and compensation for all execs plus top 1% of compensated employees regardless of position (this is being done to an extent already) --Force approval of all severance packages over a certain amount to go to shareholders for approval first --Force approval for any material increase (say >5%) in compensation of execs and rainmakers that are not direct percentages of newly created revenue streams from shareholders --For any TARP recipients who have not yet paid back in full, salary increases capped at COLA for execs and rainmakers That could be a start. I would not want to put the caps on non-TARP firms, as I feel that sets a dangerous precedent. But if they had to get bailed out, until they pay back with interest, they are at the taxpayers' mercy.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 10:52 AM) Proof that I defend Guillen. QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 10:52 AM) Really? Anytime anything Ozzie comes up, you throw Kenny under the bus so as to make him look better. Every single time.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 09:51 AM) I hated Burn After Reading, and I'd have to say that Raising Arizona didn't quite do it for me. I agree that Burn after Reading was pretty bad, I would consider that one of their flops. Raising Arizona I liked, but not as much as the other ones I listed.

OK look, there is no doubt that executive salaries at large firms in the US are going up faster than the salaries of the average worker. I don't think anyone would dispute that. But here is what no one is saying - what do you want do about it? And what are the full consequences of those actions?

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 10:05 AM) ^All of this^ Seriously, why is this even being discussed anymore? It's the board vs. Marty, greg, and occasionally elrockinMT, and they cannot be swayed from their opinion which the rest of the board finds moronic. That's all. Even elrockin isn't really defending Ozzie, he's just generally loyal and positive about the team. The only ones defending Ozzie are marty and greg.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 09:44 AM) Part of the problem is that you assumed the typical worker makes $50k. That number might be a little off depending on the year you pick. See that trick they used? "The nation's largest companies". It might be $11.1M among, perhaps, the Fortune 50. For all companies, that number will be under a million, I guarantee it. Also see how they used "the average American worker" - not necessarily the workers in those companies. This is an obvious trick of numbers. Now, if you want to tell me about ONE company... say, you don't believe the CEO of Ford should make 12M when the line workers make 60k... then fine, make that argument to Ford, and there are plenty of reasons to do so. But don't make it sound like something it isn't.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 09:31 AM) 475:1? I highly doubt that number. You are telling me that at an average company in the US, if the average worker makes say 50k, that the CEO makes $23,750,000? Not a chance. The number of CEO's who make that kind of money can be counted on one hand. The rest are below that, in most cases way, way below that, by 1 to 2 orders of magnitude. If you are going to use stats to make your case, at least try to make them believable.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 09:03 AM) His job is to report what Guillen said. No, that isn't his job, unless Ozzie has him on the payroll. His job is to report on the White Sox. As he is no longer the manager of the White Sox, Ozzie's name should only appear occasionally. And if he IS going to talk about the tumult that went on between Ozzie, Kenny, Jerry, Coop and whomever else, then his job is to paint a picture - not tell one man's side alone. He is utterly failing at his job, and it is obvious that Ozzie was the only guy who would talk to him, so he knows he is screwed now.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 07:31 AM) They can sit on him, but would have to pay him $7.5 million with what his contract reads with a bonus. That's some money that could be spent paying over slot. I think you are wrong here. The bonus is there if he finishes out his term. He is electing to pursue another job, therefore, a retention bonus is probably out the window.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 08:02 AM) If that's the case, that means she just didn't know which country the LRA is located in. I'll admit, I'd have to check myself. Yeah, it was really just a grammatical mistake, nothing I'd worry much about.

QUOTE (qwerty @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 10:00 PM) Since there has been big lebowski talk going on... here is a question for some of you. What is your favorite coen brothers film outside of the big lebowski? I ask because as a whole i really enjoy them... but there are still some bona fide duds in their filmography, in my opinion. If you have just seen one or two others don't bother answering. Fargo and O Brother probably, but I also like Hudsucker Proxy a lot and many others didn't. I thought they did solid work on No Country for Old Men, though it pretty much followed the book to a T. And True Grit stands out to me as one of the very, very few remakes I have ever seen that was actually better than the original.

QUOTE (DBAHO @ Oct 19, 2011 -> 06:47 AM) Did Bachmann call Africa a country? From what I read, it was more that she didn't seem to know Libya was in Africa. She said something like, Obama took us into Libya, now he wants to take us into Africa. As Balta said, with Bachmann, that is pretty far down the list of scary for her.

QUOTE (Marty34 @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 09:31 PM) Because you can't take even the slightest hint of criticism of Kenny Williams. Just stop the pain, please. Most of the people you accuse of loving KW have, in this very forum, criticized the heck out of him. Do you not wonder why it is that you are virtually alone (+greg775) in your absurd defenses of Ozzie? Do you think that everyone else is somehow in love with Kenny Williams, when a poll taken on SoxTalk a while back showed a majority here would like to see him gone, or at least out of the GM seat? Do you not see the disconnect in your logic here?

Forgot to record this one, damn. Read through the live blog of it. Seems like Cain is living outside of reality, doesn't understand how people think his tax plan will raise taxes on anyone. Says it is a simple plan, then says no on understands it. Figured this would happen, he is drowning it appears. Also sounded like Michelle Bachmann doubled down on the crazy. Instead of just a border fence, she wants a DOUBLE walled border fence, LOL. And apparently spent a lot of time screaming to get attention, literally screaming. She is so toast. Some praise for Gingrich though, and Romney and Santorum. Perry sounds like he's treading water. That sound about right, mr g?

QUOTE (iamshack @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 01:17 PM) Have you been reading and listening to the Boston media the last few days? It's an absolute disaster right now. Jon Lester actually was calling in to all the media outlets yesterday trying to clear the players' names. John Henry is showing up at radio stations and trying to do damage control, meanwhile, he keeps insisting publicly that he was not in favor of signing Carl Crawford (way to give him a boost of confidence, John). There is simply no way in hell the Red Sox can afford to keep Theo anywhere in the picture. He's a local guy, this was his dream job, they won 2 titles during his tenure, etc. The fans are furious that they blew the division, but there is a growing backlash that Francona and Theo have been getting thrown under the bus by management. Keeping him around on the payroll and effectively blocking him from moving on with his career will not be a good PR move. Who said he has to be in the picture? Not I. QUOTE (Harry Chappas @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 02:12 PM) Theo and the Red Sox can easily patch things up if need be...just like last time he quit. There's that too, though this situation may be too far down the road now.

Another inexperienced coach? And one who is a natural hitter anyway? Please no. I love Thome, but we already hired a green Manager, we need to surround him with some experience of some kind.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 09:25 AM) He also has a $3.5 million bonus that comes due if he serves out the last year of his current contract. ..which he is choosing not to do. Boston has the position here. They will sit on him and pay his $3M for doing nothing, rather than letting him go for nothing at all. Cubs will cave and give them McNutt or someone else valuable, what few valuable pieces there are in the Cubs system.

QUOTE (Milkman delivers @ Oct 18, 2011 -> 12:36 PM) I find it sickening that Cooper isn't allowed to go over the head of his boss, but that's exactly what Ozzie did and it couldn't be more acceptable. Spot on.